BvS MOS 2 and Justice League being filmed simultaneously?

[Llama_Shepherd]

it should be, but knowing WB it's not. They have no long term vision. They have enough trouble getting one DC movie per 3 yrs out on time.

They seem to be doing fine to me.

2005-Batman Begins
2006- Superman Returns
2008- The Dark Knight
2009- Watchmen
2011- Green Lantern
2012- The Dark Knight Rises
2013- Man of Steel

 

[Rocketman]

The hate for DC in these threads is truly puzzling. People don't seem to face the cold, harsh reality of Marvel Studios here. Marvel's two biggest properties are Spider-Man and X-Men and they don't even have the rights to make movies of them. That's like DC/WB not having the movie rights to Batman or Superman, MGM does, so they focus on Teen Titans for 13 films over a span of 6 years. Give me a break.

WB can put EVERY DC character together in one universe, and they will. Marvel can't. That's why when Marvel fanboys are boasting that "We're getting an Ant-Man movie before we get Justice League hahaha" or "We're getting Guardians of the Galaxy before Wonder Woman hahaha", that's because those are among the only characters that Marvel actually CAN make movies of, since they don't have the rights to their biggest characters. They are stuck with third-tier, fourth-tier characters that they can't squeeze much out of.

To me, WB has such a tremendous advantage, one that will prove to be a better cinematic universe over the next decade. There won't be any legal issues on whether or not Flash and Green Lantern can be in the same movie. They just will be.

Meanwhile, while Marvel seems to be "doing it right" with all their endless characters, I don't seem to notice anything happening with Deadpool, Punisher, Blade, or Ghost Rider, and I believe Daredevil is stuck as a Netflix original series. Sounds great.

 

[roach]

I can feel the hate welling up inside you.

 

[SpideyFan866]

What are the "Hollywood Trades" anyways? I've see that said before, but never really knew what it meant.

Variety, Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, The Wrap.

Sites where we usually see exclusive casting and film news drop.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

The hate for DC in these threads is truly puzzling. People don't seem to face the cold, harsh reality of Marvel Studios here. Marvel's two biggest properties are Spider-Man and X-Men and they don't even have the rights to make movies of them. That's like DC/WB not having the movie rights to Batman or Superman, MGM does, so they focus on Teen Titans for 13 films over a span of 6 years. Give me a break.

WB can put EVERY DC character together in one universe, and they will. Marvel can't. That's why when Marvel fanboys are boasting that "We're getting an Ant-Man movie before we get Justice League hahaha" or "We're getting Guardians of the Galaxy before Wonder Woman hahaha", that's because those are among the only characters that Marvel actually CAN make movies of, since they don't have the rights to their biggest characters. They are stuck with third-tier, fourth-tier characters that they can't squeeze much out of.

To me, WB has such a tremendous advantage, one that will prove to be a better cinematic universe over the next decade. There won't be any legal issues on whether or not Flash and Green Lantern can be in the same movie. They just will be.

Meanwhile, while Marvel seems to be "doing it right" with all their endless characters, I don't seem to notice anything happening with Deadpool, Punisher, Blade, or Ghost Rider, and I believe Daredevil is stuck as a Netflix original series. Sounds great.

Just say back to them: "We got the entire Harry Potter universe and most of the Tolkien Legenendarium on film with 14 films. Is Marvel even trying?"

Then they'll see how tiny a studio Marvel Stduios is compared to the rest of Buena Vista

 

[InJustice]

Just say back to them: "We got the entire Harry Potter universe and most of the Tolkien Legenendarium on film with 14 films. Is Marvel even trying?"

Then they'll see how tiny a studio Marvel Stduios is compared to the rest of Buena Vista

Even worse, if the Superhero fatigue sets in, Marvel has nothing to bounce back on, compared to the many other movie studios.

 

[Rocketman]

I can feel the hate welling up inside you.

I'm actually lying in bed eating a bowl of Golden Grahams with a grin on my face, thanks.

 

[SpideyFan866]

The hate for DC in these threads is truly puzzling. People don't seem to face the cold, harsh reality of Marvel Studios here. Marvel's two biggest properties are Spider-Man and X-Men and they don't even have the rights to make movies of them. That's like DC/WB not having the movie rights to Batman or Superman, MGM does, so they focus on Teen Titans for 13 films over a span of 6 years. Give me a break.

WB can put EVERY DC character together in one universe, and they will. Marvel can't. That's why when Marvel fanboys are boasting that "We're getting an Ant-Man movie before we get Justice League hahaha" or "We're getting Guardians of the Galaxy before Wonder Woman hahaha", that's because those are among the only characters that Marvel actually CAN make movies of, since they don't have the rights to their biggest characters. They are stuck with third-tier, fourth-tier characters that they can't squeeze much out of.

To me, WB has such a tremendous advantage, one that will prove to be a better cinematic universe over the next decade. There won't be any legal issues on whether or not Flash and Green Lantern can be in the same movie. They just will be.

Meanwhile, while Marvel seems to be "doing it right" with all their endless characters, I don't seem to notice anything happening with Deadpool, Punisher, Blade, or Ghost Rider, and I believe Daredevil is stuck as a Netflix original series. Sounds great.

QFT.

While it may not seem like it, not having F4, X-Men, and Spider-Man really hurts Marvel.

Not having them forces Marvel to make their movies Avengers centric, due to them lacking franchise star power outside and separate of that group. F4, X-Men, and Spider-Man (moreso than any other Marvel characters) can exist on their own. The same can't be said for the others, who very largely rely on each other to keep their stories going.

Now look at DC/WB, who have ALL of their characters and, while not getting their main characters on track (YET), they have shown competency making succesful adaptations of their minor characters, be it on tv or film.

Now, WB is setting up to launch a shared universe with their tip heroes, as well as launch them into their own solo franchises.

And when WB does get their universe in full swing, Marvel might be in for a world of hurt.

 

[Shikamaru]

The hate for DC in these threads is truly puzzling. People don't seem to face the cold, harsh reality of Marvel Studios here. Marvel's two biggest properties are Spider-Man and X-Men and they don't even have the rights to make movies of them. That's like DC/WB not having the movie rights to Batman or Superman, MGM does, so they focus on Teen Titans for 13 films over a span of 6 years. Give me a break.

WB can put EVERY DC character together in one universe, and they will. Marvel can't. That's why when Marvel fanboys are boasting that "We're getting an Ant-Man movie before we get Justice League hahaha" or "We're getting Guardians of the Galaxy before Wonder Woman hahaha", that's because those are among the only characters that Marvel actually CAN make movies of, since they don't have the rights to their biggest characters. They are stuck with third-tier, fourth-tier characters that they can't squeeze much out of.

To me, WB has such a tremendous advantage, one that will prove to be a better cinematic universe over the next decade. There won't be any legal issues on whether or not Flash and Green Lantern can be in the same movie. They just will be.

From a box office standpoint, they most certainly have the advantage. From a quality standpoint, having the rights to Flash and GL means nothing if you can't get them right on the big screen. That's not to say Marvel doesn't have their own fair share of character screwups (they most certainly do), but at least most of their main characters were translated well and were very well received, as well as their top films as a whole (notice that I said "top films", so please don't go on an IM2/Thor rant).

Meanwhile, while Marvel seems to be "doing it right" with all their endless characters, I don't seem to notice anything happening with Deadpool, Punisher, Blade, or Ghost Rider, and I believe Daredevil is stuck as a Netflix original series. Sounds great.

And that is a problem because...?

As long as budget isn't an issue (which shouldn't be with someone like Daredevil - look at Arrow), television can in many ways be a better place for superheroes than even the movies due to not being restricted by time issues and being allowed to do ongoing story arcs and other things like that much like in actual comics. Plus, Netflix originals are becoming more and more popular. House of Cards is huge and it is entirely on Netflix.

It is a smart move for Marvel to do this.

 

[Loki882]

Jumping to the worst possible conclusion and declaring that the sky is falling based on no real actual evidence seems to be many comic book fans default setting. "The movie got pushed back a year, oh my god it's going to be a disaster." NO, that's not how it works. They may have simply pushed it back to try and make sure that they get the best movie possible, which would make the delay a GOOD thing.

 

[Rocketman]

QFT.

While it may not seem like it, not having F4, X-Men, and Spider-Man really hurts Marvel.

Absolutely. And it limits major stories they might want to do in the future. How can they do Civil War without changing the entire thing?

Not having them forces Marvel to make their movies Avengers centric, due to them lacking franchise star power outside and separate of that group. F4, X-Men, and Spider-Man (moreso than any other Marvel characters) can exist on their own. The same can't be said for the others, who very largely rely on each other to keep their stories going.

Again, this is why I'm not sure how much longer Marvel Studios can keep this going. If you look at X-Men, they've had the same series (and continuity - loosely) going on for 14 years now (since 2000), and they're still going to keep cranking them out. Can Thor have his own movies for 14 straight years? Can Captain America? No.

^ They rely ENTIRELY on putting them all together. It can only be more of the same for the rest of the run - however long it lasts.

Now look at DC/WB, who have ALL of their characters and, while not getting their main characters on track (YET), they have shown competency making succesful adaptations of their minor characters, be it on tv or film.

Now, WB is setting up to launch a shared universe with their tip heroes, as well as launch them into their own solo franchises.

Yep.

And when WB does get their universe in full swing, Marvel might be in for a world of hurt.

I think they're in a world of hurt already, with or without DC doing anything. There doesn't seem to be an Iron Man 4 on the horizon (RDJ has basically said he's done - he's bound by a contract). I can't see Thor 3 or Captain America 3 setting the world on fire. Marvel doesn't really give a crap about Hulk or his own film again. And honestly, if Ant-Man and Guardians of the Galaxy (and Doctor Strange) are going to be the future of what we're getting... it's not looking good at all.

DC, on the other hand... People seem to mistake not cranking out 3 movies a year as being equal to "They don't know what they're doing." It's not that they don't know what they're doing, it's that they're going to do it right.

This release date push seems to indicate that. Hiring an Oscar winning writer to polish up a script that's probably already decent indicates that.

They're not going to set up a problem where all they have to rely on is Teen Titans 4 ten years from now.

Most importantly, WB still has the greatest superhero trilogy of all-time, and it doesn't matter at all if it has anything to do with a shared universe. It means nothing. Quantity < Quality.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Jumping to the worst possible conclusion and declaring that the sky is falling based on no real actual evidence seems to be many comic book fans default setting. "The movie got pushed back a year, oh my god it's going to be a disaster." NO, that's not how it works. They may have simply pushed it back to try and make sure that they get the best movie possible, which would make the delay a GOOD thing.

As far as we know, it's the exact same film. The delay will do nothing but delay the film.

 

[Marvin]

The hate for DC in these threads is truly puzzling. People don't seem to face the cold, harsh reality of Marvel Studios here. Marvel's two biggest properties are Spider-Man and X-Men and they don't even have the rights to make movies of them. That's like DC/WB not having the movie rights to Batman or Superman, MGM does, so they focus on Teen Titans for 13 films over a span of 6 years. Give me a break.

WB can put EVERY DC character together in one universe, and they will. Marvel can't. That's why when Marvel fanboys are boasting that "We're getting an Ant-Man movie before we get Justice League hahaha" or "We're getting Guardians of the Galaxy before Wonder Woman hahaha", that's because those are among the only characters that Marvel actually CAN make movies of, since they don't have the rights to their biggest characters. They are stuck with third-tier, fourth-tier characters that they can't squeeze much out of.

To me, WB has such a tremendous advantage, one that will prove to be a better cinematic universe over the next decade. There won't be any legal issues on whether or not Flash and Green Lantern can be in the same movie. They just will be.

Meanwhile, while Marvel seems to be "doing it right" with all their endless characters, I don't seem to notice anything happening with Deadpool, Punisher, Blade, or Ghost Rider, and I believe Daredevil is stuck as a Netflix original series. Sounds great.

Curious, what do you think would happen if WB owned only Blist characters at this point?

Moreover, what do you think Marvel Studios would be doing if they still owned all their Alist properties?

 

[Rocketman]

Curious, what do you think would happen if WB owned only Blist characters at this point?

Moreover, what do you think Marvel Studios would be doing if they still owned all their Alist properties?

I see what you're doing, but I'll bite.

If WB didn't have Batman and Superman movie rights, I think they'd do what they've been doing. Watchmen, V For Vendetta, Green Lantern, Jonah Hex, Constantine. They just announced Sandman. More Vertigo-related titles. A History of Violence. Road to Perdition. RED. More adult-oriented material, because frankly, DC has more adult-oriented material and isn't bound by just superheroes. Really, not an amazing filmography, but they'd still put one or two out every year like they've been doing. Definitely more Vertigo stuff - Y: The Last Man, 100 Bullets, etc.

I'm not sure where the A-List stops with DC and the B-List begins, but I wouldn't put Wonder Woman, Flash, or Green Lantern on the B-list. So, nothing would be happening there. I'll admit that Batman and Superman are ultimately DC's bread and butter. But it's the same case with Spider-Man and X-Men with Marvel. The only difference is, we're talking in hypotheticals; DC actually CAN (and will) put them all together.

Marvel, for example, has second-tier characters, (and third-tier, and fourth-tier). Nobody knew who Iron Man was in 2007, and they turned that around in one year. I applaud them for that. Same with Thor. Nobody gave a damn about Thor. These Avengers characters (I'll include Ant-Man and Guardians) were like the comic books our moms picked up for us at the grocery store as a surprise, because the comics were in a bargain bin for 99 cents, and we threw them in a corner because we suddenly realized our moms were poor and couldn't afford X-Men for us.

By the way, this is a more suitable topic if the question was, "What if DC Comics started a movie studio called DC Studios, but they didn't have the movie rights to Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern?" And, "DC Studios only has the movie rights to Hawkman, Red Tornado, Metamorpho, Cyborg, and Zatanna."

If Marvel had the rights to all their characters, it would be a DISASTER. And the reason for that is that they have three-times as many characters as DC does, and that's not a good thing. Again, quantity does not equal quality. If Marvel seriously explored the idea of putting Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, ALL IN ONE MOVIE, it would be an absolute disaster. You thought Spider-Man 3 and X-Men 3 was a problem? Oh boy, you couldn't imagine.

In my opinion, I LOVE that Marvel Studios doesn't have Spider-Man, X-Men or Fantastic Four. It puts them in check. I don't like shared cinematic universes all that much. I think it ends up being limiting instead of making it more expansive. Instead of opening up infinite doors and infinite possibilities, it puts everything in a corner. It does the opposite of what it should do. I'll go on record and say that I don't want WB toying around with Justice League for too long. I basically want:

Man of Steel
Batman vs. Superman
Justice League
Wonder Woman
The Flash

^ And that's it. That's all I want. If Justice League 2 is thrown in there, along with Solo Batfleck, that's fine too. But not this craziness that Marvel's doing. Let it end at some point.

 

[Frodo]

I don't get the Marvel or the DC hate frankly. I want both of them to succeed because comic films that do well in the mainstream means both companies have a better chance at exploiting their properties. Disney Marvel has done well, and they should get credit for that. By the same token Nolan and WB have given us TDK trilogy which has done as much work as Marvel films have in paving the way for the mainstream to take these properties seriously, so they deserve credit as well. Neither studio is perfect, they're only human.

Yeah, Disney/Marvel had a plan and that's what worked for them. WB is still trying to figure out what their plan is and whatever they do , will be tailored to their needs. There's no right or wrong way to do it . As long as they're both putting out quality product that gets the average joe interested in this stuff , everyone wins regardless.

I'm happy for Marvel because I remember how long it took for them to get where they are ,and I hope they have continued success. WB are big boys , and eventually they'll find the path that works for them even if they stumble and fall a few times.

 

[J.Howlett]

I see what you're doing, but I'll bite.

If WB didn't have Batman and Superman movie rights, I think they'd do what they've been doing. Watchmen, V For Vendetta, Green Lantern, Jonah Hex, Constantine. They just announced Sandman. More Vertigo-related titles. A History of Violence. Road to Perdition. RED. More adult-oriented material, because frankly, DC has more adult-oriented material and isn't bound by just superheroes. Really, not an amazing filmography, but they'd still put one or two out every year like they've been doing. Definitely more Vertigo stuff - Y: The Last Man, 100 Bullets, etc.

I'm not sure where the A-List stops with DC and the B-List begins, but I wouldn't put Wonder Woman, Flash, or Green Lantern on the B-list. So, nothing would be happening there. I'll admit that Batman and Superman are ultimately DC's bread and butter. But it's the same case with Spider-Man and X-Men with Marvel. The only difference is, we're talking in hypotheticals; DC actually CAN (and will) put them all together.

Marvel, for example, has second-tier characters, (and third-tier, and fourth-tier). Nobody knew who Iron Man was in 2007, and they turned that around in one year. I applaud them for that. Same with Thor. Nobody gave a damn about Thor. These Avengers characters (I'll include Ant-Man and Guardians) were like the comic books our moms picked up for us at the grocery store as a surprise, because the comics were in a bargain bin for 99 cents, and we threw them in a corner because we suddenly realized our moms were poor and couldn't afford X-Men for us.

By the way, this is a more suitable topic if the question was, "What if DC Comics started a movie studio called DC Studios, but they didn't have the movie rights to Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern?" And, "DC Studios only has the movie rights to Hawkman, Red Tornado, Metamorpho, Cyborg, and Zatanna."

If Marvel had the rights to all their characters, it would be a DISASTER. And the reason for that is that they have three-times as many characters as DC does, and that's not a good thing. Again, quantity does not equal quality. If Marvel seriously explored the idea of putting Spider-Man, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Iron Man, Hulk, Thor, Captain America, ALL IN ONE MOVIE, it would be an absolute disaster. You thought Spider-Man 3 and X-Men 3 was a problem? Oh boy, you couldn't imagine.

In my opinion, I LOVE that Marvel Studios doesn't have Spider-Man, X-Men or Fantastic Four. It puts them in check. I don't like shared cinematic universes all that much. I think it ends up being limiting instead of making it more expansive. Instead of opening up infinite doors and infinite possibilities, it puts everything in a corner. It does the opposite of what it should do. I'll go on record and say that I don't want WB toying around with Justice League for too long. I basically want:

Man of Steel
Batman vs. Superman
Justice League
Wonder Woman
The Flash

^ And that's it. That's all I want. If Justice League 2 is thrown in there, along with Solo Batfleck, that's fine too. But not this craziness that Marvel's doing. Let it end at some point.

You're my man. With you all the way. Print this out, people.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ The truth is while comic sales will pretty much always remain relatively stagnant (I'm sad about this too) movies can repair the IMAGE of a superhero. Imagine if Aquaman was a well-written, well-performed character in a GOOD movie. There wouldn't be as much PC bashing of him.

 

[Jekecy]

QFT.

While it may not seem like it, not having F4, X-Men, and Spider-Man really hurts Marvel.

They're certainly not hurting right now. They may not have their top tiers, but slowly but surely they're redefining who are the top heroes in modern pop culture. If they're successful, it doesn't matter that they're stuck with B and C-listers. Now they've made them A-class.

Now, WB is setting up to launch a shared universe with their tip heroes, as well as launch them into their own solo franchises.

And when WB does get their universe in full swing, Marvel might be in for a world of hurt.

That's the thing, we haven't seen it. Yet. I agree WB firing on all cannons, successfully, obliterates most of what Marvel has as a studio. But all that ammo means zilch when they're not being fired. So for now I don't know how anyone is really making the argument that they're not seriously lagging. What they can do remains a distant possibility at this point.

 

[JKKS085]

I think they're in a world of hurt already, with or without DC doing anything

^This is pretty much what everyone said before the studio launched its universe with Iron Man back in 2008. A lot of people predicted that they wouldn't even last a year given that they didn't have the rights to a single A-list property. This is the reason why I really can't take this comment seriously.

But see this is the difference between Marvel Studios and WB. While WB can keep an A-list character like Flash in the limbs for years or turn a white hot property like Green Lantern into a **** fest, Marvel turns a bunch of B or C-List characters into blockbuster material because they have to.

Seriously who could've predicted 10 years ago that in 2013, Iron Man would be a bigger draw than Batman and that a Thor movie would gross around the same as a Superman flick ?

 

[Rocketman]

Seriously who could've predicted 10 years ago that in 2013, Iron Man would be a bigger draw than Batman

Umm... huh?

 

[Marvin]

Ironman isn't a bigger draw than batman imo.

Namely due to what kinda dip you will see in the brand itself without that actor. Batman "is more than any one man" lol. As we will all see soon.

Secondly, IM3 was the ironman centric sequel to Avengers. Without avengers, his averages...were looking a little different. I was told by a friend that they thought IM3 was going to be about Tony stark helping Banner as implied by the final scene in avengers..etc.

Just saying, I'm not so sure the IM brand is a bigger draw than the bat in the grand scheme. And just like in the Timm universe, when bat god shows up, he's gonna get even biggert:

 

[Marvin]

I see what you're doing, but I'll bite.

Actually, I just wanted your opinion. Seeing how much of one you seem to have.

By the way, this is a more suitable topic if the question was, "What if DC Comics started a movie studio called DC Studios, but they didn't have the movie rights to Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern?" And, "DC Studios only has the movie rights to Hawkman, Red Tornado, Metamorpho, Cyborg, and Zatanna."

And no, it's not a more suitable question in your example.

When it comes to traditional costumed heroes, WB is all about Batman and Superman, if you were to keep everything the same and remove those two properties from them, that would be it. You'd still get subversive adaptations such as constantine and veritgo stuff but heroes such as flash and whomever...probably not. What's more, because they are a film studio first, they would continue to hire non comic book creators to make their films in which you end up with all the dc films that have no Goyer involvement but rather folks like Martin Campbell and Akiva Goldsman(fully misguided when it comes to the genre). One thing marvel studios has going for it is that is has comic book folk working close with them on each property. They may lack in cinema but they embrace the more genre first. Whedon can write kick ass comic books, and they gave him that much control over a film? Fox and WB had a chance to do that but they needed their hollywood assurances(Singer).

If WB came up with a DC studios division, than you'd see all of that stuff come into play, but as it stands, it's WB. What's funny is that Marvel studios is working with only Blist characters and they can't stop turning things out, If they had more to work with you'd be seeing everything with possibly less focus on some of the C-listers. It taking so long for WB to commit to Superman and JLA, if marvel had Spidey and Reed Richards, it would be the first thing they attack...

Before MCU made the shareholders give these genre a double take, WB would be doing more of the same old stuff, Fox would only be making Hugh jackman pictures..things have changed and now we are getting "Xfactor" and "Wonderwoman".

In a nut shell, things as they are, you won't be seeing hawkman, you might not even be seeing lantern or flash. If wb had a DC studios in marvel vain, allllllll this stuff would have been green lit last year.

 

[kendalag]

Umm... huh?

Yep ... he's the 2nd biggest draw ... and mainly due to RDJ and his charisma. Still IM solo movies don't draw in comparison to the recent Batman films ... TDK adjusts to over 600 million ... TDKR over 475.

Iron Man 3 without 3D is closer to 375 ... Iron Man adjusts to 370 ... Iron Man 2 around 330.

Can't compare Avengers as it's a team concept.

 

[Boom]

Seriously who could've predicted 10 years ago that in 2013, Iron Man would be a bigger draw than Batman?

He's not.

 

[Shikamaru]

I think he meant that an Iron Man film outgrossed a Batman film. Just a very poor choice of words on his part.